As commentators, we often focus on those who can’t afford lawyers and are thus deprived in a tangible way to access to justice. We often focus on the very sophisticated purchasers of legal services. Large companies, for example, with full in-house legal departments. We often don’t talk about those in the middle: individuals and small
LexisNexis today announced its latest enhancement to its Lexis+ platform, Judicial Brief Analysis. Besides the bells and whistles, there are three noteworthy things.
LexisNexis today announced its latest enhancement to its Lexis+ platform, Judicial Brief Analysis. According to the LexisNexis Press Release, Judicial Brief Analysis is designed to quickly identify similarities and differences in opposing filings across multiple documents. It thus can help assess the strengths and weaknesses of the argument on both sides of a matter. It’s an AI-based research tool that can compare briefs and present the analysis in a smooth, impressive dashboard. This elegant dashboard will:
On September 14, Law360 Pulse released its annual Glass Ceiling Report. The Report summarizes Law 360’s Survey of women in law firms for 2020. Every time I hear about one of these Surveys, I hope for once, it will reveal some real progress. But they never do: just like the Law 360 Diversity Survey results previously discussed, the Glass Ceiling results are discouraging. Not just discouraging. Embarrassing. It makes me mad. It ought to make us all angry.
The standard advice used to be for lawyers to model their client service after Starbucks. Make the experience and service fantastic. But if the current state of Starbucks service (and that offered by many other businesses) post-Covid is any indication, that’s the worst model for lawyers. A better model: double down on customer service and experience.
I recently had the following exchange with Starbucks support:
I was pleased to hear the recent announcement that Natalie Kelly, the former Director of Law Practice Management for the Georgia State Bar Association, has accepted the position of Director of Legal Management at the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC or Center).
Natalie is one of my favorite people. Since I hadn’t had the chance to talk with her in a while, I reached out to Natalie recently. I wanted to get her thoughts about her new position. We talked about her new job, the SPLC itself, legal tech, and even the responsibility of law firms and law firm leaders to speak out against hate.
“There are two kinds of people in the world. Those with loaded guns and those that dig. You dig”.
Blondie to Tuco in the 1966 movie, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
The increased number and sophistication of litigation analytical programs calls to mind the above line from one of my favorite movies, The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. In the movie, the line sums up the obvious advantage a character holding a loaded gun (Blondie, played by Clint Eastwood) over a character with an unloaded one (Tuco, played by Eli Wallach). To paraphrase Blondie, there will soon be two types of litigators in this world: those who use litigation analytics and those who, well…dig. For those who use analytics, its a good time to be a litigator.
According to a recent article by Gregg Wirth in Thompson Reuters Legal Executive Institute, the notion of the fancy traditional downtown office of law firms is fundamentally changing. And with it ultimately, in my view, the nature of the profession. Three immediate factors are driving this change: partners are embracing remote work, the trickle-down effect on the use of technology, and a new emphasis on cutting costs. All three of these factors will change how lawyers view tech and working from a central.